There has been a ridiculous uproar over the last year or two by crazed leftists to have Gone With the Wind banned because it is "racist:" Even a loony-toon post on this board.
So using the very same logic they have put forth, shouldn't Roots and all its copycat films be banned also. They all depict and demonstrate vile racial atrocities.
To me they are way more disturbing in that regard than Gone With the Wind.
So using the very same logic they have put forth, shouldn't Roots and all its copycat films be banned also. They all depict and demonstrate vile racial atrocities.
That's an interesting, yet odd, perspective.
So, because as you put it, Roots showed more hate, bigotry, violence and mistreatment of slaves then that's okay and non-racist. And since GWTW showed less, it's racist.
To me, as long as they both depict the Cicil War deep South and slavery, they are both very racist by those defining them by these basic terms.
And of course I'm being entirely cynical about this topic as I think the whole argument is entirely ridiculous.
So, because as you put it, Roots showed more hate, bigotry, violence and mistreatment of slaves then that's okay and non-racist. And since GWTW showed less, it's racist.
Maybe not expicitly stated as such, but that was the contrast you used to express your opinion.
shareYour original post decried calls for GWTW to be banned because those who believe it should be say it's racist.
You then said that if GWTW should be banned, then Roots should be banned as well for the same reason.
Without getting into the silliness of banning *anything*, all I did was to explain that the reasons that those who think GWTW is racist is because the slave owners in GWTW were by and large benevolent to their slaves. Since Roots shows abuse of slaves, you can't use the same analogy.
Well one thing I certainly agree with you on, is that this entire topic is incredibly silly.
But your argument that since Roots shows more bigotry/abuse means it's less racist, just doesn't compute. That would make it even more racist.
You're missing my point. Those who say GWTW is racist say it's so because it doesn't show abuse of slaves whereas Roots does.
But you have me curious. Do you really believe Roots is racist and, if so, how?
Ahh, I understand your point better now. But I still feel a lot argue that GWTW should be banned moreso just because it represents the Old South and bigotry.
But let me answer your question now, which really illustrates my point.
Roots is a stark reminder and illustration of the deep South of days past and all the bigotry and abuse of slaves that went along with that.
Now compare that to all the more recent clamor around the Confederate flag and statues depicting Civil War heroes.
They are calling for the removal and banning of these flags and statues. Why? Because they are a stark reminder and illustration of the deep South of days past and all the bigotry and abuse of slaves that went along with that.
Got it?
Got it?
I agree with you completely on all your insights and commentary.
And like you, I feel all these films, artifacts and relics serve as a window to our heritage and our history. And if we can learn from them, it can only serve to educate and enrich us, and better unite us going forward.
"Roots" was told from the POV of the slaves, while "GWTW" was told from the viewpoint of slave-owners who didn't see anything wrong with owning slaves.
Personally I found it VERY educational to see how slave owners thought, it taught me a lot about the social history of the US, to put it politely. IMHO anyone who wants to ban this film is a fool, the fucking oceans are dying and they're worried that people are going to believe everything they see in old movies written by racists.